spencerone@???:
>>>> Testing can be done using a clickable .pdf and achieve both the swift
>>>> deployment of paper testing and the effective functionality and scaling
>>>> of a programmed prototype. I can do this if needed, or work with
>>>> whomever is interested (has time).
>>
>> I would be interested in knowing which tools would you use to create
>> such clickable PDF? Do you have anything special in mind.
>
> In the past I have used Apple Keynote, though there are other ways to
> get the clickable .pdf, I have not yet come across any. Setting the
> display of the .pdf to fullscreen provides a near-perfect simulation of
> the actual experience, plus you can capture data from the device or VOIP
> session, too.
Yes, Keynote is the equivalent of PowerPoint. With tchou we've been
using LibreOffice Impress which does the trick as well. Our mockups were
a bit rough so the content and interactions were there but the look and
feel was not really exciting.
>> I'm also still
>> interested in knowing which tools you use to draw your mockups.
>
> Adobe Illustrator.
Ok, and are there any toolkit to draw interfaces, buttons, input fields,
etc. Or did you draw each element yourself?
> Now, I would prefer to use something else, like
> Inkscape, but the UI and tools aren't yet up to par for intensive
> labor/accuracy.
Unfortunately...
>>> intrigeri:
>>> So, next step is that those who have more time available to put into
>>> the Greeter thing team up and finish prototypes (be it on paper or
>>> actual code) that can be tested with users, right?
>>
>> Yes. I think Alan and Spencer should refine theirs. If we get
>> together in November I'll get back and polish the one we started with
>> views that we started with Alan.
>
> Our latest (all of ours) is at this point[0], so, if you have some sweet
> ideas about the composition of the previous iteration, word, but know
> that your reservations prompted further refinement and there are two
> views, one for each end of the use case spectrum.
>
> You could help refine this, which would sooner give us a clickable .pdf
> we can test all over the world next week (or whenever).
Ok.
>> I'm also more and more tempted to really explore the possibilities of
>> online prototyping tools, like InVision and tons of others. I know that
>> tchou have been using some and it would be cool to finish a benchmarking
>> with our specific needs in mind.
>
> To unfairly pick on InVision:
>
> - It has a "Sign Up" button, so I couldn't get much further :(
>
> - It seems, based on "All plans include 128 bit SSL encryption and daily
> backups", like we would be uploading work to other people's computers,
> same with our community data :(
>
> - It is free for one project :)
>
> - They waive their hands of any responsibility for their
> actions/negligence in their ToS :(
>
> - Closed-source :(
>
> - They have a pink LinkedIn mobile icon as their logo :)
>
> - They employ Google services :(
Yes, all this is quite bad :) And we'll definitely have to trade-offs
quite a lot of our "ideals" on privacy, not depending on shitty
companies, etc. if we want to use one of these.
I know that tchou has more experience with them, maybe we could find one
that match better our expectations.
> We could use third-party online tools, but only if they are truly
> needed. They offered prototyping tools, VOIP, messaging, and version
> control, all of which we already have. The one other thing they offer
> is team/task management, which Redmine kind of does, but might be
> overkill for our current situation.
What I felt would be interesting in such tools is:
- Toolkits to draw interface mockups efficiently, so that all of us
can propose things quickly and with a similar visual language.
- Possibility of visualizing, manipulating, commenting on the objects
directly and by different people.
- Possibility of testing the mockups directly without having to turn
them into another format (paper, clickable PDF, etc.).
There's a comparison of prototyping tools on Wikipedia that could be a
start to explore this further:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_software_prototyping_tools
> I feel like we could DIY this. I would be happy to do so, or at least
> work out the pros and cons and map the path to be taken so we can see if
> it is worth the effort, since it aligns with our UX and testing needs
> (and with the sentiments of our hosting preferences).
